Hi all, very interesting discussion,
There's a sense in which the more people use one's valuable information and
data, the more valuable it becomes. Indirectly the value feeds back into the
museum or the sector, because it is seen to be a player in areas which are
important and interesting to people. Directly is more difficult but it might
well result in generally raising the profile of museums and helping to make
the case that cultural services are valuable and should be funded.
When by far the largest proportion of funding will always be from public
sources, it may well be more useful to be able to point to ways in which we
contribute to the economic effectiveness of big players like the OS or the
Beeb than to tiny amounts that we could gain from keeping our data to
ourselves. I read an argument a little while ago that it would have
generated far more economic benefit to the UK in general if the OS products
were all free and didn't have to be paid for. (That's why some sort of
creative commons license would be needed for museum info - to prevent others
making money out of it - but then again, why shouldn't they?).
As Paul Miller and others have written,
>We need to let go of our data. We need to recognise that no one solution
>(including Google!) meets all needs all of the time. We therefore need to look
>at ways in which we can deliver our data to people, to aggregators, and to
>value adders, so that it can be used in new and interesting ways that -
>ultimately - raise awareness of our institutions and use (physical or virtual)
>of the resources they hold in trust. We don't need to do it all. We also don't
>need to squash innovation with interminable legal contracts on re-use.
>There is associated content, though, that could be made widely available and
>which would act as a draw to your institution and its core content. You don't
contract with someone to provide it to them. You simply make it available.
Consistently. Coherently. Whilst ensuring Currency. If enough institutions do it
coherently, consistently and currently ENOUGH, then third parties will use data
to include museums and their offerings in all sorts of interesting new ways.
My view is that these notions shouldn't stick at opening hours and location
(heavens, museums spend lots of money *trying* to get this information
public!), but to what's in the collection. Let's end the days when this data
could only be made available via carefully selected and interpreted
'exhibitions'. We quite urgently need the collections to be seen as
relevant, first thing is to let people know what's there!
Suzanne
(don't forget EVA, folks - registration opening soon)
EVA London conference 25th-30th July 2005
The Foremost European Electronic Imaging Events in the Visual Arts
http://www.eva-conferences.com/eva/london/london2005/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Suzanne Keene
Museums and the information age
http://www.SuzanneKeene.net
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|